Page 10 of 20 FirstFirst ... 34567891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 193

Thread: New Newcastle

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    21,805
    Quote Originally Posted by huyrob View Post
    Let’s not look at the oversexualised picture here, although I broadly agree with you. This is a week where the Catholic Church is expecting a deluge of claims for abuse going back many years and our own Prof Phil Scraton is carrying on his honourable work in now seeking out the injustices of the Magdalene workhouses. I am agnostic but we, here, worry about lfc club transfer funds when these wrongs still remain unpunished and NUFC have been taken over by a tyrant and alleged accomplice to murder. How the hell The premier league has accepted assurances that The government won’t be running the club when the Ruler is chairman of the fund ($ 203 b ) defies belief. I foresee a shortage of brown envelopes as many have been used here.
    Probably one for the off-topic section and saying that probably little interest for a more expansive discussion.

    Suffice to say the least risk a child faces is with its own family, once born and out of the womb. All other persons are more likely to be offenders against children statistically. Of course most abuse occurs in the home but that is merely a reflection of opportunity afforded. Or a per capita times risk phenomenon.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    224
    Just to throw in something.
    If you were earning £250k per week and still in demand as a footballer, ..would you do a tv advert with your child to promote a razor? Greed knows no bounds but hey! Quite easy for a club to “acquire” said razor company and pay a fistfull of dollars over the odds for his appearance. Not on books , simples. Yes he declares it to HMRC and his accountants as income but , so far as aI know he doesn’t have to provide an audit trail. So so simple to circumvent the rules. ps Adam Lallana may have done similar!

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTV View Post
    Probably one for the off-topic section and saying that probably little interest for a more expansive discussion.

    Suffice to say the least risk a child faces is with its own family, once born and out of the womb. All other persons are more likely to be offenders against children statistically. Of course most abuse occurs in the home but that is merely a reflection of opportunity afforded. Or a per capita times risk phenomenon.
    You are right. Another thread is the best home.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    21,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Taksin View Post
    Barca, like Utd have used a debt model - servicing debts becomes a part of their outgoings. Low interest rates have upped the temptation to keep pushing up the debt and we can see where that has gone wrong at Barca even without rising interest rates.

    Chelsea in my opinion do not have our level of squad yet - I mentioned how we had a number of players in the world top ten, or twenty whatever it was, and some of those players are on their third contracts now if I'm not mistaken. Chelseas don't have that. They did start out with Ken Bates saying 'we'll double your wages' to LFC players but I don't think they are currently operating that way since FFP, unless you know otherwise
    All 3 clubs have higher valued squads and seemingly only manu pay their squad more than ours.

    Chelsea will have some legacy players on big wages and unlikely to have added the players they have done on the type of contracts you are speculating. They do have a few academy players as well though.

    It's only now that we are approaching a renewal cycle where our players are hitting the bigger wage levels of those clubs.
    Prior to this cycle, our top earner Salah currenly isn't on much more than fullbacks of the other clubs.

    Trent has now reached that level of fullback pay.

    We are paying this level of wages due to our income increases and to keep the lads here and away from those 6 clubs essentially, minus barca who are somewhat knackered due to the inflation.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTV View Post

    We have a few players in the very top end. City have had plenty of them and more top end in reserve. Many of ours are getting significant pay rises presently.
    Our wages increase because of the inflation in wages in football and the revenue increases in football.
    We have more players at the top end on more advanced contract extensions. I don't think they had 5 in the top 10/20 18 months ago. We did.

    Anyway, this argument is self-refuting. On the one hand you're saying they have more players on high wages than us. You're getting this from reports on wages. On the other hand we're saying our wages add up to more than theirs. We're getting this from reports on wages.

    Either we're paying our players more or we aren't. You'll have to explain if you think they are being under paid. If Sterling is only on a paltry £250k per week, or whatever is amounts to, you'll have to say he should be being paid more than Mané or something.

    Quote Originally Posted by CCTV View Post
    Seems a bit paradoxical to highlight city and chelsea as being a major cause of football wage inflation, a top end competitive side for longer, yet somehow having a smaller wage bill
    It isn't paradoxical if we accept that transfer fees are different to wages. People really only talk about transfer fee inflation - that's why they convince themselves that we are falling behind Villa and Everton. In reality we are currently driving wage inflation. And it's not because we are profligate - it's because we have excellent players who we want to hold onto in a market that values them highly. All it took was a wonder goal from Salah and there is a chorus of 'give him whatever he's asking for'. No-one is calling for that, currently, with Jesus, Mahrez, Havertz or Mason Mount.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    21,805
    Quote Originally Posted by huyrob View Post
    Just to throw in something.
    If you were earning £250k per week and still in demand as a footballer, ..would you do a tv advert with your child to promote a razor? Greed knows no bounds but hey! Quite easy for a club to “acquire” said razor company and pay a fistfull of dollars over the odds for his appearance. Not on books , simples. Yes he declares it to HMRC and his accountants as income but , so far as aI know he doesn’t have to provide an audit trail. So so simple to circumvent the rules. ps Adam Lallana may have done similar!
    When talking about mbop for the kop, I have speculated that Nike might prefer to see Mbop in a Nike Kit and could incentivise Mbop to move to Anfield.
    Essentially offsetting loses or increasing his yield compared with a bigger contract from Real.

    That would be a benefit to us due to Nike being our kit sponsor through the interests of other parties, namely Nike.
    The only difference between that proposed reality and the ones at hand here, is that the owners of man City could use their 3rd party in a similar manner. Whereas we don't own Nike.

    Nike have a more established interest in footballers than emirates, but essentially if JWH owned Nike he could be the one suggesting the above proposal and could be doing so to alleviate the burden of ffp regulations.
    The emirates not having a traditional interest in footballers could reasonably argue they want a slice of these global icons in their brand association.

    Psgs airline iirc has run adds with numerous top footballers and a lot who play for psg. So it isn't something I think that ffp/unfair have much hope in preventing.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by Taksin View Post
    We have more players at the top end on more advanced contract extensions. I don't think they had 5 in the top 10/20 18 months ago. We did.

    Anyway, this argument is self-refuting. On the one hand you're saying they have more players on high wages than us. You're getting this from reports on wages. On the other hand we're saying our wages add up to more than theirs. We're getting this from reports on wages.

    Either we're paying our players more or we aren't. You'll have to explain if you think they are being under paid. If Sterling is only on a paltry £250k per week, or whatever is amounts to, you'll have to say he should be being paid more than Mané or something.



    It isn't paradoxical if we accept that transfer fees are different to wages. People really only talk about transfer fee inflation - that's why they convince themselves that we are falling behind Villa and Everton. In reality we are currently driving wage inflation. And it's not because we are profligate - it's because we have excellent players who we want to hold onto in a market that values them highly. All it took was a wonder goal from Salah and there is a chorus of 'give him whatever he's asking for'. No-one is calling for that, currently, with Jesus, Mahrez, Havertz or Mason Mount.
    Absolutely spot on.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTV View Post

    It's as simple as saying here's your new contract for 25kpw less than what you signed on for, we must meet ffp regulations.
    Now here's our offer in terms of investment in you via whatever means they decide.
    But that would have to be a contract. that's your first problem.

    Secondly, the money has to go from somewhere and end up in Sterling's possession. That's not as easy to keep under the radar as you seem to believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by CCTV View Post

    Then it's up to the player and agent to make a choice.
    This type of dilemma occurs regularly enough at a smaller scale for normal folks. Cash in hand.
    Cash in hand would be a possibility. But it wouldn't be in a contract - so he and his agent would have to trust that it would show up. I get the feeling that Sterling believes he is worth it so would expect the highest rewards possible for his services.

    And then what does he do with that cash if the govt are tracking large payments / transactions?

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,502
    Anyway, this is an interesting conversation but I think the burden of proof is still on you. The information we have is our wage bill is the second highest. You can say 'brown paper envelopes' or 'ambassadors role' all you like but unless there is any knowledge that this is what's happening, there is no reason to believe it is definitely true. It may just be that, blow me down, we have the second highest paid squad in the league and FFP has some bearing on that.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    everywhere and nowhere
    Posts
    3,566
    BBC sport are reporting that 19 of the 20 premier League clubs have objected to the Saudi take-over of Newcastle.
    Yes, that means Man City have objected to state ownership of a premier League club.
    You couldn't make it up, could you?

Similar Threads

  1. Your team v Newcastle
    By Insidious in forum Football Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 24th April 2021, 01:19 PM
  2. Liverpool vs Newcastle LIVE!
    By Sky Sports in forum LFC News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 24th April 2021, 11:22 AM
  3. Your team v Newcastle
    By Insidious in forum Football Forum
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 30th December 2020, 10:52 PM
  4. Newcastle 0-0 Liverpool highlights
    By Sky Sports in forum LFC News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30th December 2020, 10:40 PM
  5. Newcastle vs Liverpool LIVE!
    By Sky Sports in forum LFC News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30th December 2020, 08:00 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •